The COVID-19 pandemic altered the methodologies of teaching and learning, particularly in higher education, for nearly three years. However, the prolonged absence of in-person instruction exacerbates the disparity between learned theory and actual practices. Some state college and university education systems have a history of adopting policies devoid of constituent demands.
Faux Convenience
One of the promises of a hybrid configuration is the marketing of self-paced learning as "flexible instruction." In a perfect hybrid setting, both students and instructors have the freedom to access online materials at their own tempo. Nonetheless, many individuals appear adamant about the increased cognitive burden that the hybrid setup necessitates.
"Video lectures that have been recorded are frequently inert. I am disengaged as a result of its artificiality.” A university third-year student expressed that digesting a lecture that is typically completed in one hour on-site requires twice as much time and mental capacity in a hybrid configuration.
In the majority of colleges, lectures for the current academic year remained online, while laboratory and departmental examinations were administered on campus. This selective emphasis transfers the emphasis of face-to-face classes away from replicating critical discussions and toward high-stakes examinations. Suddenly, authentic onsite discussions were substituted with monotonous recorded recordings. Discussion forums replaced consultations. Raising hands has been reduced to the Zoom and Meet features. The rigorous art of dialogue has also been reduced to an incidental form for the sake of convenience.
Even colleges that transitioned to hybrid instruction confronted difficulties. After laboratory classes, students are frequently required to complete online lectures and formative assessments. In addition, given the university's insufficient resources, accessibility remains a concern for the transition from a traditional to a hybrid learning environment.
In addition, there is a clear disparity between the development of skills through online education and their application in real-world settings. Despite the absence of on-site training, unprecedented expectations were placed on academic programs whose competencies depended on practical skills.
Under a hybrid arrangement, the combination of the digital and physical landscapes complicates non-traditional pedagogy. Students have to overcome a harsher learning curve in order to comprehend lectures in addition to their typical course deliverables, as opposed to traditional classes where class schedules were clearly defined. Loss of shared pace further blurs the distinction between work and personal spaces. And without classroom structure, the flexibility of hybrid classes remains unfulfilled
Hybrid Setup Comes with Hidden Cost
In Mid-July, it was announced that the educational system will transition to blended learning for the 2022-2023 academic year. Quezon City University later verified that the delivery of face-to-face classes was at the discretion of colleges, stating that each can switch to a hybrid structure based on the preparedness of the faculty.
This non-standard implementation of face-to-face classes gave priority to programs with laboratory courses (mostly from white colleges) to transition to an on-site setup, whereas some courses continued to operate under the standard online instruction.
Students and faculty raised logistical concerns due to a severe lack of preparation time. Due to immediate demand, students from distant provinces were forced to pay significantly more for transportation and shelter. Bureaucracy from face-to-face requirements (e.g., Physical Exams) also burdened students not residing outside of NCR but also to those students who are residing at the Metro. The contentious academic calendar also strained the finances of those who resided outside of Manila. Students whose financial resources had been decimated by the pandemic were compelled to comply with the administration's anti-student policy.
Discourse Requires Conducive Learning Spaces
Even though students have returned to campus, there is little support to sustain the reopening of facilities and learning spaces. Students at some universities returned to campus to find construction sites, a shortage of classrooms, and flooded areas, all of which are symptoms of a broader problem of budget cuts in state-funded universities. This is also the culmination of years of neglect on the part of the administration to respond to students' requests for adequate space. If the university wishes to fulfill its mission of developing critical thinkers, it must heed the requests of its constituents.
A genuine academic reform necessitates a dialogue between the principal staff, faculty, and students. Administrators must recognize that certain nuances of traditional learning cannot be replicated through online learning, regardless of how innovative contemporary methods may be.
The resumption of 100% face-to-face classes for the upcoming semester will bring to the fore issues that were dismissed during the pandemic. Eventually, the dearth of spaces, faculty, and resources will outweigh the growing demand for free, high-quality education. On top of this, is the recent 124.8 million budget cut that the University of the Philippines received as reflected in the 2023 General Appropriations Act.
As long as designing configurations remains unilateral, we will continue to pursue myopic policies that we perceive to be answers to complex problems. A university lacking in student welfare is evidence of a deteriorating democracy. A startling metaphor for the political unrest in the country. The problems encountered in the current hybrid system are symptoms of a profoundly entrenched education crisis, not distinct obstacles.
Comments